For Information Purpose Only vs P.I.Abraham
2021 Latest Caselaw 10612 Ker

OP(C) 434/2021                                 1/2



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                            Present:
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

                    Monday,the 29th day of March 2021/8th Chaithra, 1943
                                      OP(C) No.434/2021

            For information purpose only
EP.NO.38/2003 IN OS No.250/2000 of the MUNSIFF COURT, DEVIKULAM
PETITIONER/1ST JUDGMENT DEBTOR/1ST DEFENDANT
       P.I.ABRAHAM,AGED 78,
       S/O.P.M.ITTI, DOING BUSINESS AT 39-MUNNAR MEDICALS, AND RESIDING
       IN THE SAME ADDRESS, MUNNAR P.O., KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM
       TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.
RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDER AND THE JUDGMENT DEBTORS 2 AND 3/
PLAINTIFF AND THE DEFENDANTS 2 AND 3.
1. M/S.TATA TEA LIMITED,
    NOW KNOWN AS M/S. TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LTD., REPRESENTED
    BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, SOUTH INDIA ESTATE DEPARTMENT,
    REGIONAL OFFICE, MUNNAR, MUNNAR P.O., KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM
    TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.

and 2 others

   Op (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed along with
the OP(C) the High Court be pleased to issue an interim direction to stay all further
proceedings in EP.No.38 of 2003 in OS.No.250 of 2000 on the file of the Munsiff Court,
Devikulam pending consideration of the above original petition, in the interest of justice.


  This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in
support of OP(C) and this court's order dated 05-03-2021 and upon hearing the arguments of
SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S.V.ABRAHAM
MARKOS, ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS, ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS & ISAAC
THOMAS, Advocates for R1, the court passed the following:
                                                                                        [P.T.O]
 OP(C) 434/2021                                  2/2



                                          ORDER

The Court below has reported that the application for temporary injunction was not filed by

the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact such an application was

already filed, but it may probably be missing.

Interim order is extended for two months.

For information purpose only Post after vacation.

29-03-2021 Sd/-

T.V.ANILKUMAR,JUDGE

/true copy/ Sd/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

msv/2 30.3.21